I've taken a look at a few C libraries, and here's my initial results: Git: (Example from commit.h) GIT_EXTERN(const git_oid *) git_commit_id(const git_commit *commit);
Tensorflow: https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/blob/master/tensorflow/c/c_api.h SDL: https://github.com/SDL-mirror/SDL/blob/master/include/SDL_vulkan.h - Prefix is still important - It looks like the struct is prefixed, and the methods for the struct are prefixed with the struct. So, there may be a struct called git_repository, and the method would be called something like git_repository_open. For the most part, it looks like structs would be named something like OIIO_ImageBuf vs OIIOImageBuf. I personally don't like the _ in class/struct names, but I come from Python. - There doesn't seem to be a consensus on constructor/destructor naming. I'm guessing we may want to go for Type_init and Type_free? Or there's the Rust way Type_new and Type_drop. - If we want to borrow some conventions from Rust: https://rust-lang.github.io/api-guidelines/naming.html For example, a constructor is usually called Type::new(some_args: Arg) -> Type, or Type::with_something(something: Something) -> Type. On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 5:53 PM Larry Gritz <[email protected]> wrote: > As much as I'd like things as short as possible, I'd prefer names and > capitalization have as much symmetry as possible between the C++ and C > interfaces. For users trying to make sense of the APIs, we want to honor > the "principle of least surprise." > > But I'd certainly defer to modern C sensibilities, however they have > evolved their practices without true namespaces and classes. > > > > On Oct 19, 2020, at 5:23 PM, Scott Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yeah, I think we'd want to target C99, because as far as I know, most > things with a C ffi target C99. > > I'll try to gather a list of C projects to see how they name things. Also, > I'll probably share some of how Rust names functions and methods to > hopefully gather some more options. > > On Mon., Oct. 19, 2020, 3:55 p.m. Anders Langlands, < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> I’d personally prefer to see if we could shorten the names a little so >> “oiio_ii_open” instead of “OIIO_ImageInput_open” if we could make sure that >> there wouldn’t be any abbreviation conflicts. The long form does have the >> advantage that it’s unambiguous though. >> >> Regarding standards, Visual Studio has only just added support for C11 >> and C17 in preview and I don’t think we’d need anything beyond C99 for an >> API wrapper anyway? >> >> >> >> On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 10:18, Larry Gritz <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I've been in C++ land for so long that I'm afraid I don't know the >>> idioms that modern C culture likes these days. Is what you describe >>> OIIO_ImageInput_open or OIIO_ImageBufAlgo_add... does that look like the >>> way a 2020 C programmer would try to "namespace" things in C that has no >>> namespaces? Or would a C programmer scoff at how wordy it is? >>> >>> As far as how to name overloads... I think it might be instructive to >>> look at a few individual cases first and what feels right, then see if they >>> generalize into an overall rule. I'm hesitant to propose a rule first >>> without examples to know if we're going to hate it in practice. >>> >>> Which C standard would you want to target? >>> >>> -- lg >>> >>> >>> On Oct 19, 2020, at 1:51 PM, Scott Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Sounds good to me. Also, if you want to automate the c bindings to some >>> degree, then you can look at https://github.com/EmbarkStudios/physx-rs >>> for inspiration. There's a talk in the readme with their c bindings >>> builder. Failing that, I'm fine with going through the legwork of making >>> the c interface. >>> >>> If I may make a suggestion for the naming, I'd suggest more or less >>> following what OIIO does in C++. So, for example, >>> OIIO::ImageInput.open(...) would be OIIO_ImageInput_open(...) and >>> classes/structs would be OIIOImageInput. >>> >>> The only question I have at the moment is how do we want to handle >>> naming functions with overrides? >>> >>> On Mon., Oct. 19, 2020, 1:00 p.m. Anders Langlands, < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Branching this thread to talk specifics... >>>> >>>> So to summarize the different approaches we've each taken, in my repo ( >>>> https://github.com/anderslanglands/oiio-rs/tree/master/coiio) I have a >>>> small shim library that creates a C interface to OIIO by wrapping with >>>> functions like: >>>> >>>> ImageBuf ImageBuf_create(const char* filename) { >>>> return new OIIO::ImageBuf(OIIO::string_view(filename)); >>>> } >>>> >>>> When building the rust crate, this is compiled into a static library by >>>> Cargo using CMake, with the environment variable OIIO_ROOT specifying the >>>> path to the OIIO installation. Currently the build script errors out if >>>> OIIO_ROOT is not specified, but it would be trivial to have it default to >>>> /usr/local etc. I also at one point had it downloading OIIO and building it >>>> directly, but cmake-rs had some issues with always rebuilding OIIO on any >>>> change to the crate, which made development interminable, so I stripped >>>> that out. That was nearly two years ago so may have been fixed. A good >>>> alternative would be to provide a separate (bash or python) build script >>>> that would download deps and run the build manually as a pre-process. >>>> >>>> From what I can tell from Scott's repo, cxx is doing essentially the >>>> same thing, but cxx handles building the shim library internally, so >>>> there's no need for invoking CMake from build.rs. Presumably you'd >>>> still need to specify the path to (and potentially build) OIIO and its deps >>>> using this method. If you compare the code in Scott's repo to mine, you can >>>> see they're very similar indeed. >>>> >>>> The issue I see here is that I don't think cxx actually saves you >>>> anything. In fact there's *more* code in the cxx case because you're >>>> specifying both the implementation (ffi.cpp) and the interface (ffi.h), >>>> whereas I only have to specify the implementation (coiio.cpp) and the >>>> interface is declared solely in ffi.rs. >>>> >>>> Building and linking the static library is the easiest part of the >>>> process, and is also the part that would be more generally useful outside >>>> of just Rust - you could use that C interface to trivially bind any >>>> language you want, so I think we want to preserve that. >>>> >>>> That leaves the question of how do we generate the C interface in the >>>> first place. I've been doing it manually, which is a tedious process, but >>>> works. Since it's just calling the C++ directly I think it's also >>>> reasonably sturdy against changes to the underlying OIIO API, since the >>>> compiler should catch most misuses, although I'm sure there are plenty of >>>> opportunities for subtle bugs still. Not to mention bikeshedding about >>>> naming conventions and code styles :) >>>> >>>> My idea for how to make the binding generation more automatic was to >>>> try and leverage libclang to generate the C wrappers semi-automatically. >>>> This would still require a fair amount of code: first writing the binding >>>> generator, then writing the rules for how to wrap the C++ API, but should >>>> allow generating the C API automatically, rather than maintaining it >>>> manually for every release. The downside is obviously this tool doesn't >>>> exist yet, and it would add a (optional) dependency on clang to the >>>> project. >>>> >>>> I think the best course of action here would be to write a C wrapper in >>>> OIIO itself that could be maintained along with the rest of the project. >>>> This would build a little C99 library that could be installed alongside the >>>> C++ library. This would unfortunately mean manually writing a header to go >>>> with it, although that part could probably be automated with a little >>>> scripting. >>>> >>>> Then oiio-rs should be a completely separate Rust crate that just uses >>>> bindgen to generate the unsafe API from the C library automatically, and >>>> provides a safe API on top of that. (Larry - Rust/Cargo kinda assumes that >>>> Cargo is the thing doing all the building and dependency management, so >>>> trying to provide a Rust artefact from the OIIO build process would be >>>> painful if it's possible at all). >>>> >>>> Let me know what you think. >>>> >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Anders >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 02:53, Alvaro Castaneda <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Larry and Anders >>>>> I'm helping Scott with the Rust Wrapper. >>>>> using CXX is been good, it is a very manual process and makes it only >>>>> usable in Rust, Larry you mentioned a minimal C API, that would make it >>>>> much simpler to wrap to Rust, that would also mean in can be wrapped to >>>>> many other languages, >>>>> So far we didn't want to go the C route, but that might not be a bad >>>>> idea since it would open the library a lot more and it might make it >>>>> simpler to automate, at least the bulk of it, for Rust. >>>>> >>>>> We need to discuss the approach. >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 8:40 PM Anders Langlands < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Scott, yes please do add me to the repo I’d love to take a look >>>>>> and pitch in as time allows. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 13:43, Scott Wilson <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hey Anders, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cxx has so far been pretty okay. It's pretty manual (hopefully >>>>>>> autocxx makes it better, but as far as I know, it's still nowhere ready >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> using it on OpenImageIO). Right now the process looks something like >>>>>>> this: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. Create a header/cpp file that contains all of your class methods >>>>>>> as functions. >>>>>>> 2. Create an unsafe Rust interferface that's a 1 to 1 copy of the >>>>>>> C++ side. >>>>>>> 3. Create a safe Rust interface. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For me, the really nice thing is I don't need to worry about the C++ >>>>>>> -> C -> Rust steps. It drops the C step, but I still need to write that >>>>>>> C++ >>>>>>> "ugly" interface. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Also, if you want to join in on the fun, our repo is currently >>>>>>> private while we get things to a working state. But, I can add you to >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> repo. Otherwise, I'm up for a discussion on how to take both designs and >>>>>>> come up with the best one. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 4:51 PM Anders Langlands < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Wrapping C in Rust is a two-stage process: first writing an >>>>>>>> "unsafe" FFI binding to the C API, which is usually almost completely >>>>>>>> automated with a crate called bindgen, then writing a "safe" crate that >>>>>>>> provides a Rust-y API using the unsafe FFI bindings. Wrapping C++ means >>>>>>>> writing a C API first, then binding that to Rust, which is what my >>>>>>>> crate >>>>>>>> does. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I've been meaning to return to this (and OSL, OpenSubdiv and >>>>>>>> others) at some point and try to make a project-specific C-binding >>>>>>>> generator using libclang, as manually maintaining the C stubs is >>>>>>>> laborious >>>>>>>> and error-prone. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Scott, I'd be curious to know how you're getting on with cxx, I've >>>>>>>> been meaning to look into that. I'd be happy to collaborate on >>>>>>>> something we >>>>>>>> could integrate into the main project as Larry suggests. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 12:30, Larry Gritz <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Feel free to have the discussion on-list, I'm sure it would be of >>>>>>>>> interest to many. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If there was consensus on what the Rust APIs should look like, I >>>>>>>>> would welcome adding a set of Rust bindings to the main OIIO >>>>>>>>> distribution. >>>>>>>>> Assuming that makes sense, I was thinking it would be much like we >>>>>>>>> now have >>>>>>>>> with the Python bindings. The advantage to making Rust bindings part >>>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>>> main build would be that it could be built and tested as part of our >>>>>>>>> CI, >>>>>>>>> versioned along with the rest of OIIO, and essentially never allowed >>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>> break. Also, just like we would never accept a PR that added C++ >>>>>>>>> functionality without making sure the Python bindings kept up, we >>>>>>>>> could >>>>>>>>> ensure that nothing is left out of the Rust bindings. While I can >>>>>>>>> appreciate the cleanliness and independence of it being a separate >>>>>>>>> project, >>>>>>>>> I can't help but think that it will be a neverending nightmare to try >>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>> keep the bindings in sync with the main project. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I don't know how automated it is to make Rust bindings for C (I >>>>>>>>> know it's a PITA for C++), but if making Rust bindings is >>>>>>>>> substantially >>>>>>>>> easier if you had minimal plain C wrappers for the major C++ classes, >>>>>>>>> I'm >>>>>>>>> sure there would be a lot of happy consumers of that even outside the >>>>>>>>> Rust >>>>>>>>> interest group. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I haven't had time to try Rust myself for any programming project, >>>>>>>>> though I've followed it from afar and like the idea of helping that >>>>>>>>> community. TBH, the main thing that keeps me from spending any time >>>>>>>>> on Rust >>>>>>>>> is just that I can't contemplate the hassle of trying to program >>>>>>>>> without my >>>>>>>>> favourite libraries, and having OIIO (and its many utilities that I >>>>>>>>> reuse >>>>>>>>> in basically everything I write) available in Rust will substantially >>>>>>>>> lower >>>>>>>>> the bar for me to dabble in it more. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- lg >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Oct 18, 2020, at 4:12 PM, Scott Wilson <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hey Anders, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We were inspired by what you did, and also decided to see if we >>>>>>>>> can take this in a slightly different direction/ use cxx. If you're >>>>>>>>> interested in discussing the wrapper more we can take it off the list. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 3:35 PM Anders Langlands < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I also have a rust binding here if you're interested: >>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/anderslanglands/oiio-rs >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Oct 2020 at 04:43, Scott Wilson <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Awesome, thank you very much! I'll try this out and see how >>>>>>>>>>> badly I break things. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Sat., Oct. 17, 2020, 1:02 a.m. Larry Gritz, < >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> If you know the true legal extent of the memory allocation in >>>>>>>>>>>> which that data pointer is located (in this case, the beginning >>>>>>>>>>>> and ending >>>>>>>>>>>> of the vector, if you are passing a pointer to one of the elements >>>>>>>>>>>> of that >>>>>>>>>>>> vector), then I think you could certainly consider it an error if >>>>>>>>>>>> any of >>>>>>>>>>>> these addresses lay outside that buffer: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> data + xstride*width - 1 >>>>>>>>>>>> data + ystride*height - 1 >>>>>>>>>>>> data + ystride*(height - 1) + xstride*width - 1 >>>>>>>>>>>> data + zstride*depth >>>>>>>>>>>> data + zstride*(depth - 1) + ystride*height - 1 >>>>>>>>>>>> data + zstride*(depth - 1) + ystride*(height - 1) + >>>>>>>>>>>> xstride*width - 1 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> There may be a more succinct way to put that, but I think it >>>>>>>>>>>> covers all the cases of + and - strides. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 17, 2020, at 12:42 AM, Scott Wilson < >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks! I guess to come from this at a different angle, let's >>>>>>>>>>>> say I'm doing something like this: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> std::vector<uint8_t> pixels(10*10*3*1); >>>>>>>>>>>> ImageInput.read_image(TypeDesc::UINT8, @pixels[0]) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Would there be a case where I could pick a stride value that >>>>>>>>>>>> would fall outside the pixels vector? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> PS: Thanks! I'm working on this with a friend, and hope to have >>>>>>>>>>>> something released in the near future. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri., Oct. 16, 2020, 11:47 p.m. Larry Gritz, < >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Oops, my math was wrong (in an unimportant detail): If you are >>>>>>>>>>>>> making a mosaic of 16x5 of these 10x10 images, it is 80 small >>>>>>>>>>>>> images you >>>>>>>>>>>>> are assembling in total, not 40. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 16, 2020, at 11:43 PM, Larry Gritz <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The strides don't describe the size of the image, they are the >>>>>>>>>>>>> spacing in memory of where you want the values to be placed upon >>>>>>>>>>>>> being read >>>>>>>>>>>>> (or taken from in order to write). There is no invalid set of >>>>>>>>>>>>> strides, >>>>>>>>>>>>> because the caller might want them to end up anywhere in memory. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Or am I misunderstanding? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> For a fully "contiguous" memory buffer where you intend for >>>>>>>>>>>>> every plane, scanline, pixel, and channel immediately follows the >>>>>>>>>>>>> previous >>>>>>>>>>>>> one, then in our example the strides would be xstride=3, >>>>>>>>>>>>> ystride=30, >>>>>>>>>>>>> zstride=300. (Though for a 2D image, the zstride is not used.) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Here's an example of where you might have a stride range that >>>>>>>>>>>>> is wildly outside this: Let's say that you have 40 of these 10 x >>>>>>>>>>>>> 10 x 3 x >>>>>>>>>>>>> uint8 image files and you are trying to read them in and assemble >>>>>>>>>>>>> them into >>>>>>>>>>>>> a single RGBA mosaic image of 16x5 x 4 x uint8 (the additional >>>>>>>>>>>>> channel is >>>>>>>>>>>>> alpha, which you will separately fill in as 1.0 [or 255 uint8] >>>>>>>>>>>>> because it's >>>>>>>>>>>>> not in your RGB files). Here's a cartoon to illustrate this: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> +-----------------------------------------+ >>>>>>>>>>>>> | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | >>>>>>>>>>>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-| >>>>>>>>>>>>> | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | >>>>>>>>>>>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-| >>>>>>>>>>>>> | | | | | | | | | |X| | | | | | | | | | | | >>>>>>>>>>>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-| >>>>>>>>>>>>> | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | >>>>>>>>>>>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-| >>>>>>>>>>>>> | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | >>>>>>>>>>>>> +-----------------------------------------+ >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Each of my little grid cells is a 10x10 image. But that 10x10 >>>>>>>>>>>>> image denoted by the "X" needs to be placed in memory in the >>>>>>>>>>>>> right portion >>>>>>>>>>>>> of the 16x10 x 5x10 mosaic. So what are the strides we use for >>>>>>>>>>>>> the read? >>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, the xstride is 4 because we're making room for an alpha >>>>>>>>>>>>> channel that >>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't present in the file, the ystride is 640 (= 10*16*4), >>>>>>>>>>>>> because each >>>>>>>>>>>>> scanline of the little 10x10 image that you read needs to be >>>>>>>>>>>>> placed on the >>>>>>>>>>>>> proper scanline of the 160x50 mosaic you are assembling in memory. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- lg >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> P.S. Woo-hoo for making a Rust wrapper. I think that's a >>>>>>>>>>>>> totally great thing. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 16, 2020, at 10:46 PM, Scott Wilson < >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm experimenting with a Rust wrapper for OIIO, and had some >>>>>>>>>>>>> questions about the stride. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's say I have an image that is 10x10 pixels, and 3 >>>>>>>>>>>>> channels, and 1 byte per channel. What strides would be invalid >>>>>>>>>>>>> for that >>>>>>>>>>>>> image? I'm guessing that anything between -10 * 10 * 3 * 1 to 10 >>>>>>>>>>>>> * 10 * 3 * >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 and the AutoStride would be valid, and everything else may try >>>>>>>>>>>>> to access >>>>>>>>>>>>> memory that isn't initialized. Is this assumption correct, or am >>>>>>>>>>>>> I missing >>>>>>>>>>>>> something? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> Larry Gritz >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> Larry Gritz >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Larry Gritz >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Larry Gritz >>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Larry Gritz >>> [email protected] >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Oiio-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >> > _______________________________________________ > Oiio-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org > > > -- > Larry Gritz > [email protected] > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Oiio-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >
_______________________________________________ Oiio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org
